Captaining a large group with two exes, one of whom abused the other
January 2, 2024 3:41 PM   Subscribe

I'm captaining a team of 50 people for a yearly event. Two members of my team had been engaged after dating for 8 years, but broke up about two years ago. It eventually descended (after years of verbal abuse) into him beginning to physically assault her, at which point the relationship fell apart and he went silent. Both of them want to come this year. I don't think she can be comfortable in the same room with him. What should I do?

I participate in a yearly, in-person competitive event. It has some persistent structure from year to year, but 98% of the content is produced and organized by the previous year's winning team. This means it differs greatly from year to year and the event is owned by the community. It consists of 4,000 people divided into teams of roughly 50 people each.

A man and a woman on my team had been engaged after dating for 8 years, but broke up about two years ago. They'd always had an unhealthy, codependent relationship, but it eventually descended (after years of verbal abuse) into him beginning to physically assault her, at which point the relationship fell apart. In his writhing and suffering, he insulted and alienated several other former-friends on this team. He eventually went silent, then quickly afterwards found another girlfriend and they're still together.

After two years of silence from him, both him and her want to come to the event this year. Neither's very invested in it, maybe coming twice each over the previous 10 years. But, I don't think she can be comfortable in a room with him, and she's thinking about bowing out now despite initially seeming excited about coming and seeing old friends.

So, MeFi -- is it worth exploring the idea of banning him from the team this year?

I don't want to play favorites, and I don't want to start a fight. But doing nothing here feels like being his ally and accepting the awful things he did. I feel like I ought to help an abused spouse out here, but then again, she didn't ask for it. I'm one of very few people that knows the abuse even occurred. He deserves the chance to be treated with grace and forgiveness, but she also deserves the chance to feel safe in every space she possibly can.
posted by sillyhex to Human Relations (38 answers total)
 
Does your team - or the event as a whole - have a code of conduct? It sounds like you could use one.
posted by heatherlogan at 3:47 PM on January 2, 2024 [15 favorites]


she...deserves the chance to feel safe in every space she possibly can

You already know the answer. Ban his ass.
posted by Mogur at 3:48 PM on January 2, 2024 [55 favorites]


I think you are correct that he needs to go, both because you're absolutely right that allowing him on the team is condoning his behavior, but also because your job as captain of the team is to maximize the chances of the team winning, and having alienated and insulted other team members means that he's not a good team member in general.

If you have the authority, I think you'd be absolutely justified in excluding him this year.

Edit: And yeah, having some kind of code of conduct seems like it would be a good idea for future dilemmas.
posted by The Elusive Architeuthis at 3:49 PM on January 2, 2024 [18 favorites]


Is it worth exploring the idea of banning him from the team this year?

Yes, but I don't think you should explore very long. He verbally and physically abused another person and shouldn't be on the team with anyone.
posted by kimberussell at 3:51 PM on January 2, 2024 [26 favorites]


It's NOT PLAYING FAVORITES to side with the person who was abused rather than the abuser. As long as this is a clear-cut case and not both accusing the other of abuse without external evidence, you absolutely should publicly ban his ass.
posted by rikschell at 4:01 PM on January 2, 2024 [42 favorites]


Ban him. No question. All you have to say is something like "I don't think you'd be a good fit for our team given what happened two years ago."

Honestly, I wish you'd just banned him immediately and not brought it up to her to worry about. She should get to hang out with her old friends without having to worry about this dude at all.
posted by Blue Jello Elf at 4:11 PM on January 2, 2024 [28 favorites]


I agree, your event could use a code of conduct so you and others like you aren't stuck in this position in future but I'd say she has the right to share her preferences about this, and if within her preferences, he should be told he cannot attend.

I would craft an email (so she doesn't have to talk about it if she doesn't want to) that goes something like, "As you know, Abuser expressed interest in coming to the Event. We are committed to making this event safe and comfortable for all, and therefore we intend to let Abuser know he will not be welcome. Before we reach out to him, we wanted you to have a chance to share if you have any specific desires around this - so we can incorporate that into our response to Abuser. I want to reiterate that we are very excited for you to participate and want to do everything we can to make this a safe place for everyone - and barring people who have a history of abuse is part of how we plan to make this a safe event for all."
posted by latkes at 4:13 PM on January 2, 2024 [9 favorites]


Also I would prepare a simple, factual statement to tell him, and plan to not answer his follow up questions.
posted by latkes at 4:13 PM on January 2, 2024 [5 favorites]


I don't want to play favorites, and I don't want to start a fight.
He started it.
posted by Flunkie at 4:22 PM on January 2, 2024 [25 favorites]


An organization I was affiliated with had a very, very similar problem. They did not do well with this, tried to split events so "one person could attend and the other can stay home, taking turns," and there was a lot of...how shall we say...victim blaming and defending the abuser for no other reason than thinking about these things apparently harshes everyone's mellow. Not a good look. The issues with this situation drove several other people off, including me, and contributed to the low attendance and even lower quality of participants (see, victim blaming) of the the organization now.

If for no other reason, (the victim's safety...the safety of other participants? These reasons are legion), ban him to help preserve the integrity of your organization.

Also, lead the drive for a CoC, as you are now the person with the most experience with this kind of clusterfuck.
posted by oflinkey at 4:25 PM on January 2, 2024 [5 favorites]


It seems like there are lots of reasons to ban him:
He abused someone
He alienated several members of the team
He is less invested in the group than most people on the team

Maybe your reluctance is that he will appeal to the central organizer or other teams and cause lots of problems for you? This is unlikely to happen due to his low investment in the group. With 4000 people it's not the first time something like this has happened and as captain you have wide latitude. There's no reason to worry or make the process bigger than it has to be, just tell him you don't think it's a good idea for him to join the team this year.
posted by hermanubis at 4:28 PM on January 2, 2024 [2 favorites]


I think you should decline to have him on the team because he represents a potential threat to anyone else on your team, particularly people who do not know to be wary of him. Depending on your the nature of your competition he may also represent a potential threat to other participants.

I'd personally be inclined to be brief and non-specific in the reason. He's not that invested in the firsts place (and certainly less invested than you), don't make him care about the principle of it.
posted by plonkee at 4:31 PM on January 2, 2024 [3 favorites]


Response by poster: Some additional context I forgot to add:

- Alienated friends aren't happy with him, but all think he should be allowed to come, contingent on the spouse's approval

- Another friend talked to the spouse. She said she's not bowing out because of him. The friend asked her if she'd be okay with him coming to the event, and she said it would be fine. Personally speaking, I'm not sure I believe her, but I have to take her at her word.

My reluctance is mostly based on the fact that there's nobody currently vocally in favor of banning him, including his ex.
posted by sillyhex at 4:44 PM on January 2, 2024


It's not fair to put the onus on the victim to make the call on banning him, so that she looks like the bad guy. She may feel pressured to say yes even though she's not OK with it.

Similarly, the alienated friends may not want him there but nobody wants to step up and be the person who takes responsibility for banning.

Maybe you can lead on the issue by telling the alienated friends and the ex-spouse that you want to ban him and see if they are actually grateful.
posted by riddley at 5:15 PM on January 2, 2024 [52 favorites]


Take it out of her hands. Ban him. A guy is never just abusive once. What do you want to be responsible for happening at this event?
posted by praemunire at 5:17 PM on January 2, 2024 [13 favorites]


- Alienated friends aren't happy with him, but all think he should be allowed to come, contingent on the spouse's approval

- Another friend talked to the spouse. She said she's not bowing out because of him. The friend asked her if she'd be okay with him coming to the event, and she said it would be fine.


She said it would be fine to avoid being perceived as bitter or difficult, not because it’s actually fine. Alienated friends deferring to her are not good friends, who would actively seek to protect her. Like if you tried to ban him but she came out and said “oh no it’s really okay if he’s there” then maybe he gets an invite, but it seems like there’s too much external social pressure to just pass the buck and require her to make the call.
posted by Exceptional_Hubris at 5:35 PM on January 2, 2024 [19 favorites]


Assuming this is Hunt, there is a code of conduct participants are expected to obey: https://policies.mit.edu/policies-procedures/90-relations-and-responsibilities-within-mit-community/96-violence-against

Just ban him. It's the right thing to do, and no one's entitled to Hunt. Tensions can run high when people are sleep-deprived, and the alienated friends will probably have a less good time with him around. He can find another team, including designating himself as a free agent so the organizers can match him.

As a captain, your responsibility is to help the team have a good time. Banning him will improve the experiences of a lot of other people.
posted by watermelon at 5:46 PM on January 2, 2024 [15 favorites]


I certainly think there is a good case to be made for banning him - except that implies that you're going to substitute your idea for the correct action for hers.

Since she has apparently said she's fine with him participating, it seems problematic that you're going to just jump in and do what you (and lots of metafilter folks) think is right. It reads somewhat disempoweing of her, even though your intentions are above reproach.

I'd suggest having a private conversation with her to explain that you're totally willing to ban him and take whatever heat comes with that IF that's what she'd actually like, and that you'll keep the conversation and her decision totally confidential.
posted by jasper411 at 6:33 PM on January 2, 2024 [6 favorites]


Ban him. If one of my friends put me in this situation, I would drop both the friendship and the event. If I found out an organizer had [ETA: knowingly] let a known abuser participate in a group event, that group would lose my trust, I wouldn't attend any more events, and I would warn others I knew.

Letting abusers come play is like letting a Nazi into the bar and orgs have definitely been destroyed by not having and/or maintaining rules of conduct.
posted by smirkette at 6:41 PM on January 2, 2024 [12 favorites]


"she's fine with him participating" doesn't mean she wants him to participate, so the argument that you'd be "disempowering" her is specious.
posted by watermelon at 7:22 PM on January 2, 2024 [7 favorites]


Also, no one wants to be the "bad sport" who gets a member of the social group excluded and thus draws attention and resentment and maybe even badgering from people. That's why we have team captains/moderators/heads of organizations. It's their job to be the "bad guy" in these situations.
posted by praemunire at 7:43 PM on January 2, 2024 [13 favorites]


(Honestly, I don't understand why you think it's all consistent with the safety, much less the harmony, of your team to have a guy participating who hits women. Men who do this are simply not safe to have around women. They don't spontaneously get better and it seems like it's only been two years. If I were on your team and knew you knew this history and let him participate, period, regardless of whether his ex were there, I'd be pissed at you. I don't need a teammate deciding I'm a mouthy bitch who needs to be taught a lesson.)
posted by praemunire at 7:50 PM on January 2, 2024 [14 favorites]


Best answer: Also, because I'm still mad thinking about this question, the very fact that he wants to attend shows that he hasn't actually grappled with what he's done, nor is he actually sorry for his behavior. If he had, he would have bowed out and let her have this. If he starts behaving badly, are you prepared to have him removed from the event? You're not even comfortable telling him, "No, you shouldn't come to this thing that your ex whom you assaulted is attending."
posted by smirkette at 7:57 PM on January 2, 2024 [29 favorites]


It's the captain's call, not anyone else's. She is not being disempowered here; she is not and never was the (one and only) person empowered to make the decision in the first place.

The buck stops with you.
posted by Flunkie at 8:02 PM on January 2, 2024 [9 favorites]


Please don't ask the victim for input on whether or not to ban their abuser. Ban any member who abuses another member, period. Asking a victim if it's okay for the abuser to participate is unfair and, in my opinion as a dv victim, is frankly a horrible thing to do.
posted by CleverClover at 8:14 PM on January 2, 2024 [11 favorites]


It feels like there are two aspects here: "do you feel like this person is a danger to the broader community" and "will your teams experience be better or worse with them present."

It doesn't sound like you're worried about the former, just the latter. Given that, you're the captain. In the end, the team is the group of people you want to spend the event with. Assuming this is Hunt, it's an intense long weekend that can be stressful. It sounds like it would be less stressful if this person hunted with another team. People switch teams / join teams late on a regular basis, and especially if they aren't an every year regular, I think most people will never notice he's not hunting with you all (which I add as a better or worse note that unless you loudly proclaim he's banned, no one else will notice or assume anything).
posted by lorimt at 8:33 PM on January 2, 2024


In general I feel as though it's generally correct and good for actions to have consequences, so I'm on the side that excluding the abuser is the right way to go. There is no way to completely avoid strife here, as you are necessarily making a decision that will impact one or the other of them negatively, so I'd go with the choice that'd help me sleep better at night.
posted by Aleyn at 8:37 PM on January 2, 2024


Best answer: I don't want to play favorites, and I don't want to start a fight.

I'm in a community where cis men in particular will often say they don't want DRAMA when really they are saying, "I won't intervene on behalf of an abused person and I am looking the other way." They tend to get involved only when the threats start to impact them directly.

You know what is right. You should absolutely "play favorites" if it means not enabling a person who hurt someone else. Like, what? Dude. You know what to do here.
posted by bluedaisy at 8:42 PM on January 2, 2024 [34 favorites]


Just saw your update. Your friends are lacking courage. You need to step up.
posted by bluedaisy at 8:44 PM on January 2, 2024 [6 favorites]


I agree with everyone saying to ban the abuser, and that putting the onus on the victim to reject him is not fair.

It sounds as though she may have put her name in first, before he signed up for this... as she was "initially excited", and then not as keen. If this is the case (or even if not), you as captain should be able to say, "we want a cohesive team: let's go with one (her), and not the other (him) this year"...

~And if they both show interest again in future events, you reserve the right to choose either the first person who shows interest, the one who shows the most interest, or even simply the one who is most deserving for whatever relevant reason (best team member/strongest team player/etc).

YOU are the captain, Captain!
posted by itsflyable at 8:49 PM on January 2, 2024 [3 favorites]


I'm in a community where cis men in particular will often say they don't want DRAMA when really they are saying, "I won't intervene on behalf of an abused person and I am looking the other way." They tend to get involved only when the threats start to impact them directly.

This. Plus, the way to actually avoid drama in the first place is to have privately told the dude "absolutely not, and don't pretend like you don't know why" immediately, instead of looping half a dozen other people into waffling about it.
posted by Blue Jello Elf at 9:35 PM on January 2, 2024 [22 favorites]


You're the captain. Ban him and didn't look back. Also, for the sake of this woman, don't involve the rest of the team. You can make this decision alone without drawing extra attention to her past abuse by making it the subject of a team discussion.
posted by emd3737 at 1:27 AM on January 3, 2024 [8 favorites]


You have the right as captain to decide a person is more hassle than value. If you need to, you can say “Team cohesion is important, and I just dont have the energy to police the situation so he’s not on the roster, here is the/my CoC for all of us to use as a helpful guide going forward.” It is okay for this to be about you, since you will be answering for it.
posted by drowsy at 5:35 AM on January 3, 2024 [3 favorites]


Two questions:

Is this organization the type of organization that would want to be associated with someone who abuses women and has shown no remorse or effort to change this behavior, such as attending an anger management program?

Are you the type of person who would willingly associate with an abuser?

I would think your organizers would be, at minimum, consider the optics (is this a bro event that minimizes women?) or would they even be concerned about liability with someone that has been previously known to react with physical violence. Would organizers consider that participants could want to leave or that they would be turning off possible new participants?

Be aware that there are people who personally would shrug and not care, and that there are people who would draw a hard line and not be willing to be a member of an organization that would allow a known abuser to participate.
Which camp are you in?

If you feel this guy has rehabilitated, dealt with and continues to manage his anger issues, has sincerely apologized to this woman and the others he was involved with, and has been civilized toward the other women in his life since then, maybe you are someone who believes that people screw up and are capable of change. If you know he might still have issues with anger management and aggression, might drink heavily and use that as a reason to behave badly, or that he still harbors ill feelings toward this woman, then you are someone who enables.
I think you're going to have to take definite personal stand for or against letting this guy attend.
posted by BlueHorse at 11:40 AM on January 3, 2024


Wait. Seriously. How is this even a question? There is no excuse for not banning the abuser.

I used to be in a meetup group with over 4,000 members. Last year, a member reached out to the organizers to say that her ex had physically assaulted her, and could they ban this person from the Meetup group? The organizers told her they could not do anything unless the abusive ex actually assaulted her at one of their meetups. Don't be like those assholes.
posted by acridrabbit at 2:13 PM on January 3, 2024 [5 favorites]


A stranger attacked a male member of your team with a knife. Should you exclude the knifer from the team?

Someone stole your friend's car. Should you exclude the thief from the team?

Someone stole your teammate's wallet. Should you exclude them from the team?

And would you wait for the victims of any of these crimes to make a fuss before excluding the perpetrator? Would it be disempowering to the knife victim for his attacker to be excluded?

Domestic violence is a crime. Why treat it less seriously than other types of crime?
posted by equipoise at 11:34 PM on January 3, 2024 [7 favorites]


Assuming this is the Hunt and that you decide not to ban him, we have space on our team for her, if she wants to hunt remotely with a medum sized friendly team that doesn't have her abuser in it. MeMail me.

We are open to newcomers and our team captains have specifically requested that we invite new people this year.

We don't aim to win, so this isn't a great bet if she really wants to write next year.
posted by novalis_dt at 5:36 PM on January 5, 2024


Make it clear that he is banned regardless of whether his ex is coming or not, or approves or not, *because* he physically abused a teammate and "he insulted and alienated several other former-friends on this team".

That's enough to not meet the conduct you expect of team members.
posted by Elysum at 7:24 AM on January 7, 2024 [2 favorites]


« Older Best way to copy/duplicate/backup an external hard...   |   Return to shop or donate Newer »
This thread is closed to new comments.